tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News February 5, 2011 2:00pm-2:30pm EST
didn't see much snow at all, but this is on the big side. tomorrow will be an action packed day on fox. chris wallace with a sit-down interview with roger goodell. on fox news sunday and 4:45 p.m. eastern, bill will have a one-on-one talk with president obama. and watch at 6 p.m. eastern, have a great day everybody, thanks for joining us. . >> paul: this week on the journal editorial report, chaos in the arab street as the uprising in egypt takes a bloody turn with mubarak's concessions falling short. where will egypt go from here and what role will the use play in the transition and obama care in critical condition. a federal judge rules it unconstitutional. and a revolt bruce in the states with some governors saying they'll stop implementing it immediately. what's next in the legal and political fight?
welcome to the journal editorial report. i'm paul giggo. the uprising in egypt turned bloody as representatives of hosni mubarak clashed in cairo's liberation square. in an interview with abc news, they blames the outlaw muslim brotherhood for the violence and says he would like to stp down right away, but fears his resignation would plunge the country further into chaos. and the director of the middle east studies program at school of advanced international studies at johns hopkins university. and also adjunct fellow at stanford university's hoover institution and a frequent contributor to the wall street journal. we appreciate it, welcome to have you back. >> thank you. >> you've been predicting trouble in egypt for a long time. and the close follower in the country for a long time and everybody seems to be saying mubarak has to go, even mubarak. >> i think, paul, this is certainly not a moment for the
egyptians or haus of mubarak, he lost the affection and respect of his people and his wife and sons, you know, one son was supposed to be his trainee and one son had the full run of the economy and house of mubarak has fallen and the man had to make a choice for himself and for husband country and the game is up for him. >> paul: well, he wants to stay on he says through transition through election later this year and the united states seems to be saying you need to go more quickly and certainly the protesters in the streets are saying that. what do you think could happen? would it be better if he leaves early or late. >> the protesters don't trust him. have deep suspicion of him as a man and really they feel that if he were to stay, that it would seem like he's running out the clock, but the system, maybe even cheat and they've gone out and in fact, the whole full rebellion,
summarizes one word. they want to be gone and it's become this classic standoff, if he himself can challenge them and defy their wishes and defy the wishes of the people, he will have won. if they forced him out the democratic possibilities of egypt, we don't know. >> well, do you think that his vice-president suleiman, he he recently appointed and intelligence chief, if mubarak did resign, do you think that suleiman could organize a transition and have enough credibility across the various sectors of society to pull it off peacefully? >> well mubarak, mubarak-- i mean, mubarak, but because the rebellion has in fact come to focus on the personality of mubarak, there may be running room for-- he may come and look and say i'll be the one that draws up the contract for egypt because the old social contract
collapsed and the historical irony to this, when mubarak succeeded sadat, sadat was you be struck done and the people of egypt gave mubarak enormous running room and he healed the wounds and controversies of the sadat era and gave egypt, i would maintain 12 food years. it began well, a modest man and with israel,' attention in egyptian society that the sadat diplomacy had triggered. it could be ma maybe suleiman who heed the lessons of mubarak's own course. >> paul: what do you think of the role the military has played so far. they've refused to intervene in the sense of siding with the regime and violently cracking down the protesters. they didn't stop some of the violence much mubarak supporters from attacking protesters, but so far it's been a pretty responsible role. do you see that as a military institution that's crucial to
the outcome here? >> well, this is a black box, this whole evasion, this is a black box, this is the unknown. the role of the army. the state belongs to the army and the state belongs to the army that pulled off a great election, a state revolution of sadat and the heir of mubarak, the army is dominant-- not only by politically and military, but security, a huge economic condition. >> paul: air saying that no government-- no transition would be positive and could govern successfully without the military? >> the military and the question is, could mubarak-- >> he's bigger in his own mind at least. >> absolutely. he outgrew his country and i think that the military could put back the country from the break and i think the military takes this apparently and like the pakistani military, like
the turkish military and they believe they are guardians of the nation. >> so, what should the suhs role here be? what, they seem to have been caught by surprise, frankly, that this was happening and what should they do now. >> i don't think that birmingham is waiting on me to tell him what he thud do, but-- >> i think that he, probably got good advice, better than he like to get from the cia. >> we know, we know that the state intelligence committee, they are now underscoring that the country it's hard to read countries and mysteries of country and egyptians could never tell that the young man would set himself ablaze in tunisia and the fire and the controversy and the dispute with egypt. very haven't done well with egypt. the fact of life that it's he very difficult-- >>. >> paul: what is behind the regime, promote a transition,
being more public than we have. >> i think we've done one thing well, kind of essential, we have made sure that the army doesn't go for a crackdown. absolutely, and in fact, different with iran and summer in 2009 and circa egypt right now, the fact that iran was not in our-- that egypt is in our sphere and the kid gloves treatment, if you will, restraint of the army and restraint ever the police and restraint of mubarak, something to do they're under the gaze of america and the officer of the army which is reliant on american training and american weapons and american economic and military aid, is not one to break the bonds with the united states. >> paul: one more question, we don't have a lot of time with you if the freedom agenda of george w. bush, is this uprising a vindication of his politics. >> he should, he he should-- i think he's a modest man and he is comfortable retirement.
he can definitely claim. here is where we are, in 200 2003-- in tunisia and egypt and there is absolutely a direct connection between what happened in iraq in 2003 and what's happening today in the rest of the arab world. >> paul: thank you, more on the crisis in egypt when we come back. the obama administration is backing off the initial support of hosni mubarak, but should we help push him out? our panel debate after the break. i was young, i was in shape, and i had a heart attack.
you need to do the preventative things that you need to do for your heart health. for me, it means an aspirin regimen. before you begin an aspirin regimen. speo your dtor. mmmmm... ( crash ) ♪ mmmmm... ( crash ) ♪ mmmmm... ( crash ) when you add velveeta to spicy rotel tomatoes and green chiles, you've got a queso so good, it'll blow 'em away. mmmmm... ( crash ) - ha ha ha! - woo! - dang! velveeta & rotel.
>> i urge the government and a broad and credible representation of egypt's opposition civil society and political factions to begin immediately, serious negotiations on a peaceful and orderly transition. >> paul: that was secretary of state hillary clinton on thursday calling for an orderly and speedy transition of power in egypt. we're back with more on the crisis there. joining the panel this week, wall street journal columnist and editor dan henninger and matt comiskey and columnist mary anastasia o'grady and they're saying now, at least behind the scenes to mubarak, time to go right now. that's the right policy. it is time for him to go, and clear for the last few days,
they've finally come around to a policy which is more engaged and started in 2009 when they said they didn't interfere and never pushed mubarak to do the things that would make this a smoother transition and at the same time i think it's not too late now to see what you're seeing now, a new consciousness in egypt about democracy and i think this should be somewhat optimistic that they can carry this out. >> dan, what do you think? >> i pretty much agree with all of this, with one big caveat and i agree with what secretary clinton said about a speedy transition and matt as well. you know, what i don't agree with and i think we should support the opposition wholeheartedly as an extension of the bush doctrine. what i don't agree with is that the united states should be seen publicly pushing mubarak out ala the sha 1979. >> why not? >> it will, first of all, it will be seen as opposing him by everyone in that region. if we still have real
interests there related to help on terror. >> are you saying it will be seen as betraying an ally and that message will be heard in saudi arabia and elsewhere? >> that's right, i think it will degrade our leadership with the intelligence services in the country and help us in the anti-terror fight and i think it creates problems for israel as well so i'm saying to support the opposition and let these events unfold, but do not be seen publicly depo deposing them. >> what do you think about that argument? >> i think that the problem with the obama administration, it's spent so much time saying we will not intervene for two years, and now, very publicly, going out and saying that they have to go yesterday. and it actually would work out better if they did it the other way around, if they said clearly, we will deforehand freeman around the world and something like this happens, work behind the scenes to see if we can help in the transition. democracy is not just a bunch of people voting. >> not one election one time. >> obviously, the army is very much in charge here and
there's a lot of work that has to be done behind the scenes to allow more than just the muslim brotherhood to be the only organized political entity on the scene and that will take a little bit of time. >> and that's the question, matt. as i think everybody here in the united states wonders about because everybody loves a revolution in the beginning and you know, the iranian revolution in 1979 was full of hope. ultimately it was hijacked. do the egyptians need several months of transition here so the liberal forces, that is the non-muslim brotherhood and nonautocrat have a chance to organize? right now they're not organized. >> i think in the last 30 years of this global wave of democracy and what works and what doesn't work, the reason why it didn't work, with hamas and lebanon with hezbollah, those parties did not believe in the legitimacy of a democrat democratic solution.
they want to bring down, and rule of law, making sure that the first election-- >> are you saying that anti-democratic forces should be banned from democratic elections? >> i think they have to sort of pass be done through a legal and orderly process and this where the administration and play a role in bringing the experience it has from eastern europe, from east asia to bear in egypt. we've been waiting for it to happen in the last ten years, the arab mat tus quo must change. >> has the military in your mind played a responsible role here? >> well, i think it has and i think it has a lot of interests here that we don't see on camera. i mean, obviously, a lot of economic interests so it wants stability and in some sense, to keep someone from like gamal mubarak from coming to power and assigning his own version of crony capitalism to the future.
so, it's been playing a role, but i think that we have to remember that in a democracy, there are more institutions than the military and right now, it seems to me like that's the only institution that we can really count on going forward. >> all right. mary, thanks. when we come back, a bad week for obama care, a federal judge declares it unconstitutional and some states are suspending any efforts to comply with the mandate. where does the legal fight go from here. anks to the venture card from capital o, we get double miles on every purchase. so we earned a trip to new orlns twice as fast! bebebebebebaaa! we get double miles every time we e our card, no matter what we're buying. i'll take it. and since double miles add up fast, we can bring the whole gang. fire! [ garth ] it's hard to beat double miles! have you seen garth? oh! [ male announcer ] get the venture card from capital one. moey magazine' be rewards card if you aim to rack up airline mis. what's in your wallet? bebebebebaaa!
second ruling by a federal judge declaring the individual mandate unconstitutional. but the first to throw out the whole statute. and already, governors are fleeing with some declaring this week that they are suspending data to comply with obama care's mandate. the for more, we're joined by wall street journal senior editorial writer, and opinion.com editor. so, james, how much more likely is it that the supreme court now will overthrow, overturn, rather, this law based on the judge's decision? >> i think it's a good deal likelier because judge vincent laid out a clear rational for throwing out the entire law and not trying to pick and choose. he said the individual mandate is essential the insurance regulation scheme makes up what at the call comprehensive health care reform. you can't throw out the individual mandate without throwing out the rest of it. there are other to obama care, and leave those intact while throwing out the insurance
regulation scheme then you end up with a bill nothing at all like what congress intended to pass. it's not come hence health care reform, it's piecemeal measures. they made a case for throwing out the law. >> no big deal and that's the cost control. you conservatives be careful what you wish for and the fact goes, then we'll just have the subsidies and no discipline is cost discipline at all. is that something we should worry about? >> well, i mean, it's always, it's a real worry with the left that they're going to cause the disaster and more destruction and, yeah, i think there is a worry, but if the supreme court throws out a name like this law as unconstitutional, i don't think you can just leave the rest there. i think congress will have to intervene. >> and will have to revisit substantial chunks of it and otherwise it will seem to be unworkable. is that what you think? >> i think it will cause, if you lose the individual mandate everything now, you will see costs sore across the
country and a lot of insurance companies just collapse. >> yeah. >> i mean, it will be a very bad problem. >> paul: i want to ask you a political question. did you think the critics of this bill, republicans, conservatives are putting too much stock on the legal argument, in the sense that the supreme court, we don't know what it will do, decides to uphold obama care in 2012, the decision is likely to come down, that would be a huge boost for president obama's re'lex campaign? i mean, are they putting too much hope in a legal argument, not about in explaining why. >> i think they need to explain why the bill is bad, but i think the legal risk is one that they have to take because the opposite, and if it's possible, the supreme court declares this law unconstitutional, will be a monumental political defeat for the president. this would be as though they declared medicare or medicaid unconstitutional. this is a big entitlement. i think that the administration and the democrats are in a position of
huge political vulnerability right now. >> and do you think it's going to the supreme court and judge is the linchpin vote. >> he's probably the linchpin vote and liberals obviously will support to uphold it. the only one would be justice thomas, i think that scalia votings against it as well as. >> and it went down to he defeat at partisan lines, 51-47. all the democrats held together even the ones running for election this year, did that surprise you? >> a little bit, but you have to remember all of them voted for it less than a year ago. they circled the wagons, but it's hard to ignore the apaches around them and you know, they did vote to repeal one of the provisions in the original bill, the 1099 small business reporting mandate. >> paul: a burden on small
business. >> yeah, and that ties with 80 something votes so you're starting to see it erode a little bit. >> i was worried who are the 17 democrats who voted for the burden on small business? tom harper of delaware, up for reelection in 2012. did he think that christine o'donnell is going to be his o'opponent and has an easy-- >> and the vote what i mean by vulnerability. they say it's a flaw that stuck into the bill? oh, please they knew what they were doing, it was an act of arrogance and made them politicalically vulnerable with the supreme court case, this so-called severability issue, they did not put into the bill the idea that if you took out the mandate the rest of the bill would hold together. . >> paul: so, james, what do you think of the politics here? it's unusual for a law that was supposed to be historic and such an assault on so many fronts. >> yes, because it was a one-party law. they thought they could govern as one party rule and forget we have a two-party system.
remember, every republican member of the house and senate has now voted to appeal obama care a year after it passed. 289 members on both sides of the capitol. and it's-- so, of course, it's a partisan breakdown and the democrats decided to govern without thinking about partisan behavior. >> i had a law, a major law that was this reviled since prohibition. where to go for a quiet get away. [ male announcer ] thanks to therbitz matrix display,
you can make more knowledgeable decisions when bookg vacation packages. excuse me... shhh. but... shhhhh. too quiet. [ malennouncer ] ...youmany flight options, hotel options... [ dj ] let's take this up a notch! too loud! did someone say louder? [ male announcer ] ...and what you can expect to save wh you book themogether. everything you ed to know in onclick. perfect. [ male announcer ] when you orbitz, you know.
>> time now for hits and misses of the week. mary for you. >> this is a hit for the u.s. state department. you'll remember that there was an election in haiti in november that they tried to steal that he election and it was pretty much confirmed by international and local observers, but for a month the government tried to stick to its version of the vote and hillary clinton went down to haiti the beginning of last week and on thursday, the government announced that in
fact, two other candidates, neither of which are their hand picked candidates, will be in the run off and that's very good news for the good guys in haiti. >> jat, james. >> state lawmakers in hawaii are putting it in the cross hairs, a miss by the legislation that make it a crime to sell a toy gun to a miner. this is the nanny state run wild and i want our viewers to remember, squirt guns don't squirt squirts. squirts squirt squirts. >> paul: joe. >> and paralyzed this year, you saw it in chicago in the midwest, and this isn't only because of the blizzards, but because there's no where to put the snow. and cities used to dump it in rivers and epa banned that because of salts and chemicals that polluted the wire and now the snow piles up and melts and the chemicals go in the river anyway, this is a miss for the epa a